News and views of Constance Cumbey concerning "Radical Middle", New Age Movement, Communitarianism, "planetary humanism," "global governance," European Union, Javier Solana, Jeremy Rifkin, "New Age Politics," law in the USA, combined with life in general -- sometimes humorous, sometimes not!

Saturday, October 09, 2010

There clearly is a push, NOW, for a "Planetary Initiative for the World We Choose" plan -- clearly ON STEROIDS with much more sophistication and teeth from alliances pulled together by the World Economic Forum. Unabashedly, participants say that this is about shaping "a new global architecture." Javier Solana, was until recently "High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union." As observers have aptly noted, he has now "reinvented himself" and seems to be just about everywhere on the global governance think tank scenes.

After many of the powers Solana coveted over Europe were included in the once defeated and then resurrected post Irish pressured second vote, he made a surprise announcement just before that second Irish referendum that he was going to "retire." Since nearly every discussion of the World Economic Forum referenced back to redoing or a new "Bretton Woods," I thought I would check in the one place most apt to reflect Dr. Solana's personal thinking on the shape of the "global governance" he has long been at the forefront of -- the statement by Pierre DeFraigne, director of the Madariaga Foundation/College of Europe. The Statement was entitled "Bretton Woods III needs a new G/3." Most of it had to do with Europe needing to speak with one voice -- too many European voices were now being heard, but there was "less Europe" as a result. If Europe spoke with ONE VOICE, it would have far greater impact on the global scene and could assume the powerful role the USA had held in the earlier Bretton Woods arrangements! Equally surprising to me was the powerful criticism of three countries as interfering with the needed changes: Great Britain, Germany, and France."

Relevant excerpted language is below:

"This paper compares the international position of the EU and China with reference to the global post-crisis reform agenda. The global financial and economic crisis unveiled the existence of a credibility gap between these two international actors, with Europe finding itself in the uncomfortable position as the weaker party. Nevertheless, the EU is called upon to give a substantial contribution to the setting of new global governance structures for trade, international financial institutions and financial regulation. The challenge now is whether the EU chooses to act as a subsystem of an emerging G2 or build upon its experience of decades of international integration to develop a new model of global governance based on solidarity and sustainability . . .

"The EU-China relationship is a complex one with promising long term prospects, but doomed to be disappointing in the short term. This is less because of genuine conflicts of interests than of misperceptions in the respective public opinions and regular misrepresentations by the media. But the unanimity rule in the EU Council plays also an essential part in the difficulty since it sometimes makes European foreign policy unpredictable. This jeopardizes the EU’s reliability as a partner for China. A huge centralized power like China dislikes being confronted with the uncertainty of a block whose commitments are subject to the veto of one or a few Member-states sometimes vulnerable themselves to the influence of other large powers. Nor can it cope with EU paralysis due to the rivalry among the Big Three –the UK, France and Germany- either still clinging to memories of their lost imperial power or competing for their national commercial interests, but unable to deliver on a reliable and robust EU partnership with China1. . . . The EU will be treated as a strategic power by China only when it achieves its unity and punches its full weight in world affairs. This will take time, but it is likely to happen in the foreseeable future as the crisis evolves and the need for in-depth reforms – a Bretton-Woods III – become more and more pressing.

"From a half-to a fully fledged economic power

"The EU stands on the sideline in monetary and financial affairs contrary to the trade sector where the EU operates as a fully-fledged actor. As long as it has not fully completed its financial market unity and as long as will not have balanced its centralized monetary authority with an effective fiscal coordination, the EU will not enjoy a real monetary, financial and tax sovereignty. Therefore, the EU won’t project itself externally with a common position and speak with one voice and negotiate as a block. Its effective influence will remain far below its economic weight. Moreover if the EU , as a large economic block generating the largest flow of savings worldwide, does not dare to put its financial regulation above the unwritten neoliberal law of letting capital move unrestricted across its borders, it will have to line up its own norms and standards on the G20 minimum consensus. Eventually we are confronted here with a paradox: the EU pleads for multilateralism, but so far it is in no hurry to play as a major actor in all multilateral fora. The bleak picture made here which goes against the official complacency with regard to the EU‘s capacity to be an effective player on the international governance scene, should not lead us to write off Europe altogether.

Three factors will force the EU to resume its march towards further integration and eventually to achieve full unity and subsequent sovereignty. First, the Lisbon Treaty has a limited, but some potential to strengthen the EU’s institutional capacity through built-in mechanisms either by extending majority voting or by dodging the need for achieving a full consensus among the 27.

Second, the emergence of China as a global actor is confronting Europe with a dilemma: either it chooses to act as just an economic subsystem of a US-led OCDE and a regional security system within US-led NATO, and then it paves the way towards a G2; or it means to assert its own unique development model with a higher level of solidarity and environmental sustainability as well as more strategic autonomy so as to project its own vision of a multilateral world order in a G3-plus rules-based multipolar world.

Last but not least, the crisis will be a maker or breaker of the EU’s unity. So far common responses to successive crises have eventually proved beneficial for European integration.

Will it be true this time? It is a question of political leadership . . .

I am still wondering who or what they have in mind for the "One Voice." Here's betting it's not Catherine Ashton. Here's also suspecting that whenever whoever assumes power that Great Britain, France, and Germany might find themselves considerably weakened, if the powers are granted the "one voice" that Solana's underling at the Madariaga Foundation says Europe needs to survive, prosper and dominate.

I just peeked at Bjorn's site. He has a blockbuster column up today about Solana as well. As all know, Bjorn and I have differences BUT we don't ignore a raging fire just because we didn't like the person who pulled the alarms.

His research is valuable and he evidently has access to European sources faster than some of the rest of us.

"European Union interior ministers have come away from a meeting in Luxembourg stressing a need for the EU to speak with one voice on security matters such as terrorism threats.

But Belgian Interior Minister Annemie Turtelboom, whose country holds the EU's rotating presidency, said after the talks with Holl Lute that Europe needed "to be able to anticipate more and avoid alarming the population, and to frame better the message coming from our continent."

"Several [EU] colleagues have insisted on the need to have a single voice," she added.

Governments should warn the Joint Situation Center, the EU's intelligence coordination hub, Turtelboom said, before issuing public warnings on terrorist threats, as well as try to harmonize their terror-alert scales."

"Please NOTE: With the apparent change in the attitudes of the Catholic Church in public towards other religious peoples, it becomes necessary to know what the Catholic church really teaches. The following clearly reveals that the Catholic Church has not changed at all, but is still the same as she was before–no matter what front she parades to the world! All statements given are from Catholic sources. These statements are found to be based upon pure tradition, and have no foundation what-so-ever in God’s word of truth. These statements are here provided to clearly show how the Catholic church instructs their membership to unquestionably submit to the traditions and commandments of men–which Christ declares to be vain worship (see Matthew 15:9) and which will bring His curse (see Jeremiah 17:5), as well as to help you avoid being trapped in this same snare.)"

"A Heretic is Anyone Who Does Not Believe Every Article of Catholic Faith"

"A Heretic is Anyone Who is Not a Member of the Catholic Church"

"Heretics Cannot Gain Eternal Life Unless They Give Up Their Faith and Be United With the Catholic Church"

"Heretics Are Not Christians and Do Not Worship the True God or Jesus Christ"

"Heretics Are to Be Condemned and Punished, Even Just on Suspecion Alone, and Are Denied Any Defense All Laws and Statues of Any Country Which Prevent the Condemnation and Execution of Heretics Are Null and Void"

"The Catholic Church Declares All Heretics Anathema Heretics Are to Be Burned"

A Heretic is Anyone Who Does Note Believe Every Article of Catholic Faith

“He is a heretic who does not believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 164 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

"Heresy consists in a stubborn denial of truths which have been defined and proposed by the Church as divinely revealed doctrines. "Any baptized person who...obstinately denies or doubts any of the truths proposed for belief by divine and Catholic faith, is a heretic." Canon 1324-1325 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law.http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/heretic.htm

“He is a heretic who deviates from any article of faith.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 143, (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

"For it has been delivered to us, that there is one God, and one Christ, and one hope, and one faith, and one (Catholic) Church, and one baptism ordained only in the one Church, from which unity whosoever will depart must needs be found with heretics." St. Cyprian, The Epistles of Cyprian, Epistle LXXIII, #11. http://www.ewtn.com/library/PATRISTC/ANF5_8.TXT

"So the Christian is a Catholic as long as he lives in the body: cut off from it he becomes a heretic-the life of the spirit follows not the amputated member." St. Augustine, Sermon cclxvii., # 4 (Quoted by Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum (On the Unity of the Church), Encyclical promulgated on June 29, 1896, #5.http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum_en.html

"Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church." St. Jerome: "Commentary on Titus 3:10–11." http://www.catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

"Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life." Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (On Mixed Marriages), Encyclical promulgated on May 27, 1832, #2.http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/G16SUMMO.HTM "

"Heretics Cannot Gain Eternal Life Unless They Give Up Their Faith and Be United With the Catholic Church"

" "It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church's sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church."

Pope Eugenius IV, in "Bull of Union with the Copts", Council of Florence, Session 11, on February 4, 1442.http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm "

"Heretics (those who are not members of the Catholic Church or who do not hold to Catholic doctrine) worship a God who is a liar, and a Christ who is a liar." St. Augustine, (quoted in "Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graca", by Fr. J. P. Migne, Paris: 1866, 42:207).http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/heretic.htm

"A manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and others." St. Robert Bellarmine, "On the Church Militant".http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/heretic.htm "

" Heretics Are to Be Condemned and Punished, Even Just on Suspicion Alone, and Are Denied Any Defense

“All sects of heretics are condemned and various punishments are appointed for them and their accomplices.” Pope Alexander IV, The American Textbook of Popery, p 135 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

“For the suspicion alone of heresy, purgation is demanded.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 156 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

“All defence is denied to heretics.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 153 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

"Also, we decree and declare that all of the aforesaid persons have been and are schismatics and heretics, And that as such they are assuredly to be punished with suitable penalties over and above the penalties imposed at the aforesaid council of Ferrara*, together with all their supporters and abettors, of whatever ecclesiastical or secular status, condition or rank they may be, even cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops or abbots or those of any other dignity, so that they may receive their deserts with the aforesaid Korah, Dathan and Abiram..." Pope Eugenius IV, in Decree of the Council of Florence Against the Synod at Basel, Council of Florence, Session 7, on September 4, 1439.http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm

(* The Penalties imposed at this Council of Ferrara were "excommunication, privation of dignities and disqualification from benefices and offices in the future....to leave the said city (Basel) within thirty days of the date of this decree...to expel the aforesaid persons who have not left the city within the said thirty days and really and effectively to eject them....and they should deny them all commerce and all articles needed for human use....If there are some who ignore these orders of ours, daring perhaps to convey goods after the time-limit to those at Basel persisting in contumacy, since it is written that the righteous plundered the ungodly, such persons may be despoiled without penalty by any of the faithful and their goods shall be ceded to the first takers."Pope Eugenius IV, in Ecclesiastical Penalties Against Members of the Basel Synod, Council of Ferrara, Session 31, February 15, 1438. http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm)

"...schismatics, blasphemers and as heretics, to be punished as traitors, and to have incurred the aforesaid censures and penalties, and others to be inflicted, according as it shall seem good and justice shall persuade..." Pope Eugenius IV, in Monition of the Council of Florence Against the Antipope Felix V, Session 9, on March 23, 1440.http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm

"Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation." St. Jerome: "Commentary on Titus 3:10–11." http://www.catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

"Every possible care must be taken to hold fast to that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, and by everyone. He is a genuine Catholic who continues steadfast in the faith, who resolves that he will believe those things - and only those things - which he is sure the Catholic Church has held universally and from ancient times. It is therefore an indispensable obligation for all Catholics to adhere to the faith of the Fathers, to preserve it, to die for it and, on the other hand, to detest the profane novelties of profane men, to dread them, to harass them, and to attack them." St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitoria, PL 50:637, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html "

" Heretics Are to Be Condemned and Punished, Even Just on Suspicion Alone, and Are Denied Any Defense

“All sects of heretics are condemned and various punishments are appointed for them and their accomplices.” Pope Alexander IV, The American Textbook of Popery, p 135 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

“For the suspicion alone of heresy, purgation is demanded.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 156 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

“All defence is denied to heretics.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 153 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

"Also, we decree and declare that all of the aforesaid persons have been and are schismatics and heretics, And that as such they are assuredly to be punished with suitable penalties over and above the penalties imposed at the aforesaid council of Ferrara*, together with all their supporters and abettors, of whatever ecclesiastical or secular status, condition or rank they may be, even cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops or abbots or those of any other dignity, so that they may receive their deserts with the aforesaid Korah, Dathan and Abiram..." Pope Eugenius IV, in Decree of the Council of Florence Against the Synod at Basel, Council of Florence, Session 7, on September 4, 1439.http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm

(* The Penalties imposed at this Council of Ferrara were "excommunication, privation of dignities and disqualification from benefices and offices in the future....to leave the said city (Basel) within thirty days of the date of this decree...to expel the aforesaid persons who have not left the city within the said thirty days and really and effectively to eject them....and they should deny them all commerce and all articles needed for human use....If there are some who ignore these orders of ours, daring perhaps to convey goods after the time-limit to those at Basel persisting in contumacy, since it is written that the righteous plundered the ungodly, such persons may be despoiled without penalty by any of the faithful and their goods shall be ceded to the first takers."Pope Eugenius IV, in Ecclesiastical Penalties Against Members of the Basel Synod, Council of Ferrara, Session 31, February 15, 1438. http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm)

"...schismatics, blasphemers and as heretics, to be punished as traitors, and to have incurred the aforesaid censures and penalties, and others to be inflicted, according as it shall seem good and justice shall persuade..." Pope Eugenius IV, in Monition of the Council of Florence Against the Antipope Felix V, Session 9, on March 23, 1440.http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum17.htm

"Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation." St. Jerome: "Commentary on Titus 3:10–11." http://www.catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

"Every possible care must be taken to hold fast to that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, and by everyone. He is a genuine Catholic who continues steadfast in the faith, who resolves that he will believe those things - and only those things - which he is sure the Catholic Church has held universally and from ancient times. It is therefore an indispensable obligation for all Catholics to adhere to the faith of the Fathers, to preserve it, to die for it and, on the other hand, to detest the profane novelties of profane men, to dread them, to harass them, and to attack them." St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitoria, PL 50:637, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/6480/catholics/apostolic6chp4.html "

" All Laws and Statues of Any Country Which Prevent the Condemnation and Execution of Heretics Are Null and Void

“Statutes that impede the execution of the duties which appertain to the office of Inquisitors are null and void.” Pope Urban IV, The American Textbook of Popery, p. 106 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”). "

“Cardinal (Of Lorraine). Anathema to all heretics. “Answer Anathema, anathema." The Council of Trent, "Acclamations of the Father at the Close of the Council", Edited and translated by J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848).http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/trentall.html

"This sacred council (of Vatican II) accepts loyally the venerable faith of our ancestors in the living communion which exists between us and our brothers who are in the glory of heaven or who are yet being purified after their death- and it proposes again the decrees of the Second Council of Nicea, of the Council of Florence, and of the Council of Trent." Pope Paul VI, in Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution of the Church), Promulgated on November 21, 1964, #51.http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/v3.html "

"When confronted with heresy, she (Catholic Church) does not content herself with persuasion, arguments of an intellectual and moral order appear to her insufficient, and she has recourse to force, to corporal punishment, to torture." The Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris, H.M.A. Baudrillart, quoted in The Catholic Church, The Renassance, and Protestantism, p 182-183.

"'The church,' says [Martin] Luther, 'has never burned a heretic.'...I reply that this argument proves not the opinion, but the ignorance or impudence of Luther. Since almost infinite numbers were either burned or otherwise killed, Luther either did not know it, and was therefore ignorant, or if he was not ignorant, he is convicted of impudence and falsehood,--for that heretics were often burned by the [Catholic Church may be proved from many examples." Jesuit Robert Bellarmine, in Disputationes de Controversiis, Tom. II, Lib. III, cap. XXII, 1628 edition.

"There are many unquestionable cases of Protestants punished as heretics in nearly all the lands where Roman Catholics have had power, right down to the French Revolution [of 1798]." Catholic author G.G. Coulton, in The Death-Penalty for Heresy, Medieval Studies, No. 18, pp. 62, 1924 edition.

“A heretic merits the pains of fire....By the Gospel, the canons, civil law, and custom, heretics must be burned.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 164 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”). "

Yes, it is clear to see, the Romish usurper, that serpent of sorcery (Vaticanus means divining serpent, is an Anti-Bilbical institution based on heresy.

I do, however, believe there are some Christians in her, though they are not free because of her. That is why the Holy Scriptures firmly declare: "Come out of her my people, lest you be partakers of her plagues.."

I'm not going to launch off onany long defense of the RomanCatholic denomination, but:

1. There are plenty of hereticalProtestant denominations, or atleast heretical individual parishes, and, 2. Anyone who posts repeatposts making the same pointsover and over, and then doesn't have the courage of convictionto put their name on theaccusations, should be ignored.

Coward !

The Whore of Babylon is calledThe Mother of Harlots, not simplythe Harlot.

Paul, do you not know that the Roman Catholic Church calls herself the 'Mother Church'?

Do you also not know that the harlots in the Holy Bible are those Churches which have strayed from God's Word and Commandments, and have therefore fornicated with the World & false religion, and committed spiritual adultery in so doing?

It therefore stands to reason that the Romish 'Church' which asserts the title of Mother here, in connection with the overwhelming evidence regarding her fornications and adultery, can in return rightly be asserted as the Mother of all Harlots!

She sits on 7 hills, does she not? She is dress in scarlet and crimson [see the vestiges of RC Cardinals and Bishops] she is drunk with the blood of the saints isn't she? Haven't you heard of the inquisition? Do you not know what atrocities were committed in WW2 her name by her priests etc, by for example, the Ustashe of Croatia, against helpless Serb Christians, Jews, and others?

I submit if you know any of this and yet deny it, you are the coward!

Do you need to know a preacher's name, who stands on the sidewalk before he begins in his duty of spreading the Gospel? Or need he announce it afterward to the crowd?

"Also your final quote of "Come out of her my people" refers to Gods'people coming out of the WORLD." Look at the Biblical context of "Come out of her my people", it does apply to the notion of being in the World but not part of it yes, yet moreover it is specificaly refering here to the Mother of Harlots, which if you have not yet understood, is fornicating with the World and committing spiritual adultery, so, de facto, Christians are called to come out of her my people lest you suffer in her plagues (Emphasis, on 'her' as nowhere in Scripture is the World and Worldliness itself called 'her')!

Stop projecting your own cowardice, and stand up for the truth!

"Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerningour common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." - Jude 3

"For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago weremarked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ." - Jude 4

I Submit that to deny, here, is to deny Him in Truth, by adding & taking away, and fornicating idolatously with Worldliness and the World. the Church of Rome, above all, stands most guilty, as the Mother of all harlots. Sure there are 'Orthodox' and 'Protestant' harlots, but she, the Church of Rome, is the mother of them!

I'm not going to launch off onany long defense of the RomanCatholic denomination, but:

1. There are plenty of hereticalProtestant denominations, or atleast heretical individual parishes, and, 2. Anyone who posts repeatposts making the same pointsover and over, and then doesn't have the courage of convictionto put their name on theaccusations, should be ignored.

Same old arguement,

1. "the Protestants do it too".

2. If one signs off as "anonymous" then "your a coward and the information should be ignored".

You guys are so predictable! The heresies in Catholicism CANNOT be defended Biblically, it is a dangerous institution and continues to lead Millions/Billions astray.

I think it's safe to say that there are plenty of heretics in Protestantism. And there are plenty in Catholicism. I have to wonder what sort of blinders Catholics are wearing when they believe Jesus' mother was born sinless, remained sinless and never died but instead was lofted to heaven to be Queen of Heaven. I once heard a priest say on TV that Jesus was not born vaginally but somehow passed from inside his mother to the outside in a miraculous way. There are so many non-Biblical things that Catholics teach and believe and I don't understand how they do not question them. Then again, that Pew survey from a week or so ago claimed that many Catholics don't grasp the meaning of transubstantiation. I've read that Lutherans have a similar belief with a slightly different name and is only a hair different. People need to rely on their Bible and stop relying on men.

I don't know if this will work, but I am going to attempt to stay on topic.

From Brookings: Reform of the Multilateral Development System: Call for a High-Level Commission

At this weekend’s annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and at the upcoming G-20 Summit in November, there will be a lot of discussion on how to reform the governance, operations and funding of these two multilateral development institutions. However, the problems of the IMF and World Bank are only a fraction of the much larger challenge facing the international community.

The multilateral development system is broken. According to estimates from the OECD-DAC, the number of multilateral agencies engaged in providing development support increased from 30 in 1950 to 196 in 1980 and further to 263 in 2008. However, in terms of financial flows of official development assistance (ODA), multilateral development assistance has lost ground relative to bilateral aid flows over the last 30 years. And among multilateral aid agencies, the traditional leaders—the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) and the United Nations and its agencies—have faced a reduced share. At the time of its creation in 1960, IDA was the only multilateral soft-loan window. It was set up to bundle the resource flows to poor countries, reaping the benefits of scale, concentration and burden sharing. Today, IDA’s share in multilateral concessional resource flows is below 25 percent and its share in total concessional official aid recorded by the OECD-DAC is only about 5 percent.

The U.S. and Europe have made major strides in reforming the financial system, most notably with the passage in the U.S. of the Dodd-Frank Act. However, there remains a huge amount of work to fully define the regulatory framework, to fill in this framework with specific rules, and to organize and train the supervisors to effectively enforce those rules. It is critical that the remaining steps are coordinated on a global basis.

The most important axis of cooperation needs to run across the Atlantic, since the U.S. and Europe still dominate the financial world, especially in the more sophisticated products. We were recently members of a taskforce that examined the state of transatlantic cooperation on these issues and made a series of recommendations to optimize that cooperation. (Douglas Elliott was also the author of the taskforce's report.)

Gratifyingly, a close examination shows that the U.S. and Europe have coordinated surprisingly well, despite media reports which tend to dwell on the relatively small number of remaining conflicts. The conflicts are not minimal; they involve such important issues as agreeing on the accounting rules that underlie the many numbers used to calibrate and enforce regulation. However, the conflicts are dwarfed by the great degree of commonality in approach

Okay, usually when someone feels that is necessary to engage in the extreme focus on something to the point of dominating blog comments there is important stuff that is being sidetracked. So perhaps suggest go and take a look at what structures are being established and how they intend to get there.

This is from September, but are comments made by Solana via Brookings that are relevant to the topic at hand.

The Cracks in the G-20

The world financial crisis has served as a quick and efficient catalyst to the G-20. The first three G-20 summits of chiefs of state, in Washington, London, and Pittsburgh, will be remembered for advancing multilateralism and coordinated global action. But the G-20 remains very much a work in progress – and one that needs much work to succeed, as its most recent summit in Toronto demonstrated.

he G-20 summit in Washington in 2008 was the first at which the member countries’ chiefs of state met since the group’s creation in 1997. The G-8 was no longer an appropriate vehicle for global economic governance, given the need to stabilize financial markets around the world. The voices of countries such as China, India, and Brazil had to be heard if a coordinated response to the crisis was to be found. With the financial crisis worsening, the London summit in 2009 agreed to unprecedented fiscal and monetary stimulus and backed a stronger, more coherent regulatory and supervisory framework worldwide. In view of the G-20’s success, the Pittsburgh summit recognized it as the main forum for international economic cooperation.

This recognition raised expectations for the G-20 and granted it the prestige that it deserved: it is the only forum in which world powers and emerging countries sit as equals at the same table. The premise is clear: as the crisis made more evident than ever, the interdependence of countries is inescapable. In the face of today’s global challenges, the only possible response must be global. There is no possible alternative. But the imprecision of the agreements reached at the summit in Toronto in June has left political leaders with a bitter taste in their mouths.

Not trying to bury your comment (lol) as I believe you could be correct. I am trying to fill this thread with on topic information as this subject on whole is a important one. High level meetings are transpiring this weekend and economics as we know them hang in the balance. That is probably the what that you were referring to, and this thread topic directly relates.

Having been raised in a 1/2 Seventh Day Adventist home (my mother), I have viewed "religious liberty" developments in the SDA Magazine LIBERTY with no small amount of dismay. They were applauding virtually the entire pantheon of abominations. I posted something to one of their websites, saying something like this:

Hey you guys, there was more of importance to God than just the 4th Commandment (third, I guess to Catholics). There was also, THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME."

I have seen Liberty Magazine often applaud the multitude of "other gods" before Him.

The Scriptures further said that in the last days there would come those who say it was WRONG to eat meats . . .

Consider the SDA message on vegetarianism for one.

The Catholics have their faults, but for the most part they have it straight whom God is. Notable exceptions for Matthew Fox (now excommunicated), Thomas Berry, Basil Pennington, Thomas Keating, etc., ad nauseum.

Thomas Merton was also caught in the polytheism trap. He died in Bangkok of fan electrocution the day after giving a major address to the Temple of Understanding in New York City.

The extraordinary crisis in the eurozone poses an unprecedented challenge to the integrity of the European Union (EU). The International Institutions and Global Governance (IIGG) program asked experts on both sides of the Atlantic to assess its immediate and long-term implications for the continent's political and economic future. We were particularly interested in its likely impact on the future of the "European project"; on the shape of the European economy; on the attractiveness of the EU model of European integration; and on the EU's future as a global player. As the authors explored these questions, several fascinating themes emerged

She did indeed Constance, she did indeed! Yet creating an ad hominem out of the threads posted, regardless whether they're of the cult of SA or not, should not be allowed to overshadow the well-documented [as the site does] truths that pertain in the article concerned.

P.S., I did say "God willing" that I would not post anything to further detract. You've, however, asked for a response. I trust this suffices on my part. So, as I left a condition in my last post, I shall now return to silence on the matter, with the proviso of God willing.

I believe the point Constance was making, was to show that such a person may have motive for pushing such beliefs. Let me ask you a serious question, is this a theory you have as it pertains to the Catholic church, or do you see this as fact?

It is clear that the present path of world development is not sustainable in the longer term, even if we recognise the enormous potentials of the market and of technological innovation. New ideas and strategies will be needed to ensure that improved living conditions and opportunities for a growing population across the world can be reconciled with the conservation of a viable climate and of the fragile ecosystems on which all life depends. A new vision and path for world development must be conceived and adopted if humanity is to surmount the challenges ahead.

In response to this intellectual and practical challenge, the Club of Rome will undertake a three year programme on "A New Path for World Development" so as to achieve a better understanding of the complex challenges which confront the modern world and to lay solid foundations for the action which must be taken to improve the prospects for peace and progress.

The Programme will not only engage decision makers and experts and provide them with feasible proposals for action but will also engage with the public through a variety of channels. It will be in part, an "open source" programme. It will undertake only a limited amount of original research, drawing on the wide array of available information and research in progress. It will be implemented in close collaboration with partner organizations, providing a framework through which their ideas and contributions can be integrated. This will increase the credibility and impact of the efforts of the Club itself.

The Programme will focus on five "clusters" of related issues within the overall conceptual framework of A New Path for World Development:

JD, I've understood the point Constance was making, thank you. That is why I stated that the focus of my posts by the reader, should not be obscured by dismissing the article simply because it has been posted by a cult-member of SA, but because it is well documented and factual. In the same way, if such a member were to state that the sun appears yellow (except during sunset & sunrise), and on such a sunny day, the sky appears blue, we would not be reasonable to dismiss the person's statement as fallicious on the basis of an ad hominem.

I am not theoreticizing in the earlier posts I left, and I stand by them as being truthful.

I shall now keep silence, as any further response from others in an attempt to elicit mine in return, only further detracts form this blog which I have conditionally [ by my conditional qualifying phrase, God willing] pledged not to further partake in.

I hope this answers your questions, if not, it must suffice for now, lest I be deemed insincere on my pledge.

Could the 'Big Three of the UK, France and Germany be part of Daniel's prophecy? From Daniel 7:7-8:

7 "After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.

8 "While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth that spoke boastfully.

I think you may be missing my point so I will clarify my position and the question I was asking. I was not debating the material you posted I was asking about your position as the Catholic church being the "Mother of Harlots". Your information may form a thesis, but it does not make so fact. My question then is do you see the Catholic church as the mother of harlots as a thesis, or absolute fact?

The Catholics have their faults, but for the most part they have it straight whom God is. Notable exceptions for Matthew Fox (now excommunicated), Thomas Berry, Basil Pennington, Thomas Keating, etc., ad nauseum.

Constance,

I believe these individuals would be referred to as "apostate Catholics" not Catholics within the proper meaning of the term. Moreover Matthew Fox in fact is now Protestant.

These folks you cite are to authentic Catholicism what Todd Bentley, Benny Hinn, and Joyce Meyer are to Protestantism.

Given the amount of misinformation that continues to turn up at this site about Catholicism, it is important to be clear about this distinction.

The only reason a person would ignorantly bash another person's religion - whether the basher is Catholic or Protestant - is because he doesn't have the sound logical arguments it takes to defend his own beliefs.

If I were an unchurched person, I would rather go and sign up with the Druids than sign up with the bigots.

Maybe certain bigots who comment here ( and you know who you are ) should consider how they are making Christianity repulsive and incredible to people......along with millstones!!!

Your questions and concerns about why Catholics believe what they believe have been frequently addressed in great depth on this very blog......especially those having to do with the difference in the Catholic and Protestant Rules of Faith.

So unless it is your intention to hijack this thread in order to start another futile round of religious polemics, I suggest that you go back, do your own homework and read all the previous threads on this blog.

If you are unwilling to do that, then I am led to conclude that the only one wearing "blinders" here is you!

This paper discusses the increasingly important rol China will play in the establishment of a new international economic order following the financial crisis, and how this will alter its relative position and its geopolitical relevance. Owing to the EU's lack of political integration, and the strain this places on the EU's economic weight, the paper argues that Europe needs deeper integration if it is to come to terms with the rise of China.

Recently Glenn Beck asked for information on Maurice Strong. The people at Free Republic posted much information about the connections between him, individuals and organizations, too much to summarize.http://209.157.64.201/focus/news/2512355/posts?page=127

http://tinyurl.com/37lrvcc

The link also leads to the book Cloak of Green showing the connections between the government, the environmental movement and private business. Few will be able to buy a used or new copy, so here is a book review.http://resourceclearinghouse.blogspot.com/2010/04/cloak-of-green-book-review.html

Thanks for the excellent post on Jim Wallis. A lot of Christians have been taken in by this self-aggrandazing charlatan. Rich Nathan, who has written very incisively in the past about the New Age movement:

http://cumbey.blogspot.com/2008/08/reprint-from-newswithviews.html

...appears to have gotten on the "Sojourners Social Justice Bandwagon":

One of the links Constance posted led to this link:http://tinyurl.com/326dqm9 whose theme was HOW UNIVERSITIES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO AN ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS.

Let's try context. First two comments stood out.

1. The aim of the initiative is for all the citizens of the world to unite in placing their universal citizenship before their condition as citizens of a country, religion

2. On the issue of the Alliance of Civilizations, universities should, again, be ahead of their time, with the instruments that they have always had: the capacity to generate new knowledge that helps understand life and how to advance in it, to disseminate such knowledge, so that it can be used by society. Universitiesmust ensure that society does not forget the values that are required for the construction of a new, more harmonious, sustainable and peaceful world.

Now a couple of pages back Dave posted from a World Net Daily page.

"President Obama's Department of Education, ...now is proposing to force colleges and universities to submit to a political agenda, according to critics.

Under the proposed federal rule change, institutions of higher education "would be required to have a document of state approval … to operate an educational program, including programs leading to a degree or certificate," explained an analysis by Shapri D. LoMaglio for the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=209589

1 + 1 = control of education.

The proposed new name for our country as proposed by Obama is Stalinalia.

The Catholics have their faults, but for the most part they have it straight whom God is.**********************************Constance, I could create quite a list here, but specifically you say they have it straight as to whom God is.

They worship and pray to Mary, also called necromancy. Scripture clearly instructs that JESUS IS OUR ONLY INTERCESSOR.

They confess sins to a priest, Scripture instructs us that JESUS IS OUR ONLY HIGH PRIEST.

They teach the doctrine of Papal infallibility...ONLY JESUS WAS PERFECT AND INFALLIBLE....ONLY HIS WORDS ARE PERFECT AND TRUE, LEADING TO ETERNAL LIFE.

IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE RELIEVED JESUS OF MANY OF HIS FUNCTIONS!!! I DO NOT CALL THIS, "STRAIGHT AS TO WHOM GOD IS"!!!!

All I can say is absolutely spot on! What we have here are Novus Ordo Catholic wingnuts trying to defend a Vatican filled with New Age thinkers, along with a few Anti-Semites and a whole lotta garbage!

This quote made me laugh out loud:

"2. Anyone who posts repeatposts making the same pointsover and over, and then doesn't have the courage of convictionto put their name on theaccusations, should be ignored."

Really? REALLY?? The last four topics/threads on this website shoot that idea to death. That rule only applies to those who dont agree with the "party line" here. They get ignored, abused, attacked..what have you. Cumbey is catering to her Novus Ordo buddies. Shes smart enuff to see that the Vatican is a cesspool, but wants to hang on to those listeners I guess. This blog is sure enuff a garbage dump!

M.L., you are just trying to stir up trouble again. How about responding to my post to you that is still outstanding several days now?_____________________________M.L.,

Thank you for your response.

First of all, since I have never heard of any "Order of St. Basil" that is not in full communion with Rome, I would not be in a position to be either "happy" or "unhappy" about it. It does seem curious, however, that a group that wants to clearly distinguish itself as NOT being in communion with Rome would adopt an acronym that is so closely identified with a very important Roman Catholic monastic order - the acronym "OSB." Using such an acronym fosters ambiguity, not clarity, which (and I'm sure you appreciate this) is not part of Catholic tradition.

As regards Jack Ashcraft's ordaining bishop - if Ashcraft has nothing to hide, and was validly ordained as a Roman Catholic priest, this information should be available freely on the internet. Your claim that those who question his credentials are spreading lies to damage his reputation and have diabolical motivations for doing so is fatally undermined by the fact that--at least from what I can see online--Ashcraft has offered nothing to refute said "slanderous" criticisms.

This could all be cleared up very easily if Ashcraft would respond specifically and directly to the rumours about him with facts, evidence, and explanations. This is exactly what Brother Ignatius Mary did on his own website when he found himself the subject of an internet attack.

As regards Fr. Fortea and Fr. Euteneuer -- it was Ashcraft himself who, on this very thread, invoked young Fr. Fortea's name in order to elevate his own reputation:

I am in good company with Fr. Malachi Martin, Fr. Gabriel Amorth, Fr. Antonio Fortea, and others.

Another thing I find puzzling: If Ashcraft believes Fr. Fortea is neither priest nor a real Roman Catholic, why does he refer to him as "Fr."? And why does he put himself in the same company as Fr. Amorth and Fr. Fortea? If he believes these men are heretics, shouldn't he be seeking to DISTANCE himself from them?

Once again, if Ashcraft would simply address these issues point by point and email them to Mrs. Cumbey, I am sure she would be gracious enough to post them here for all to see, just as she did with his previous mail.

When you consider all the above points taken together you can see what a house of cards Jack Ashcraft has built for himself and why I and many others here find him evasive and untrustworthy.

Tooth Fairy, Susanna may have defended Catholicism but she has not refuted it, for she cannot outside of Scripture. There is no Scriptural support for the three(quite major) points as mentioned in my post.

I agree, this is how intelligent people settle such questions, I'm still waiting to hear your scriptural defence, (even on just ONE of the three points).

Susanna has refuted ALL your allegations on this blog and done so on more than one occasion. Perhaps you didn't like her answers. That is your right.

Resorting to distortions about someone's faith, however, as you have done so above, is not the way that adults express disagreement!

If you really believed in the teachings of the Bible you wouldn't bear false witness against another religion.

Perhaps you need to go back and learn what Jesus actually taught - if you are actually a Christian, that is. Given the shenanigans you have started on this thread, that is a question that remains seriously open to dispute!

Since you seem to know the bible so well, could you please tell me where I can find the following:

1) Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?

2) Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?

3) Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?

4) some Protestants claim that Jesus condemned all oral tradition (e.g., Matt 15:3, 6; Mark 7:813). If so, why does He bind His listeners to oral tradition by telling them to obey the scribes and Pharisees when they “sit on Moses’ seat” (Matt 23:2)?

5) Some Protestants claim that St. Paul condemned all oral tradition (Col 2:8). If so, why does he tell the Thessalonians to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thes 2:15) and praises the Corinthians because they “hold firmly to the traditions” (1 Cor 11:2)?

6) On what authority, or on what principle, would we accept as Scripture books that we know were not written by one of the twelve apostles?

7) Where in the Bible do we find an inspired and infallible list of books that should belong in the Bible? (e.g., Is the Bible’s Table of Contents inspired?)8) How do we know, from the Bible alone, that the individual books of the New Testament are inspired, even when they make no claim to be inspired?

9) How do we know, from the Bible alone, that the letters of St. Paul, who wrote to first- century congregations and individuals, are meant to be read by us as Scripture 2000 years later?

10) Where does the Bible claim to be the sole authority for Christians in matters of faith and morals?

These are just a few of the questions I have. Since you seem to know so much I figured you would be the person to ask.

Susanna said that the anti-Catholic poster was making Christianity sound repulsive (or words to that effect).Protestant fundamentalists also make it sound repulsive. The reason why it is repulsive to many who are not Christians is that it condemns them to eternal hell fire. This cannot be disputed! It is just fact.

Lately I have had a burden to pray for Jews, whom fundamentalist Protestants say will be going to hell unless they accept Jesus as Messiah before they die. I have found some interesting Protestants who are not "fundamentalists" nor are they liberal globalists, but they do claim that Jesus is their saving Messiah, and only Him.

These include Sal Smario of Daniel's Glasses and Joseph Herrin of Parablesblog and Marianne Tiorin of Heaven Awaits.

If you are horrified by the concept of eternal hell, and find it does not fit the character of the creator (too long to go into the reasons here) you too may have to take your leave of the Catholic Church (as I did) and stop going to most fundamentalist churches, as I did, even though I am a born again Christian who looks to Christ for my salvation.

Lisa, I think you are a regular to this blog and I'm a little stunned by your post. It looks to me as if you are disputing whether or not the Bible is God's infallible word to fallen man, that it contains the words of eternal life, that it is pure, holy, true and without error.

If this is your position, then we cannot have a discussion, as this is the very foundation and premise upon which I would make my defense. As Martin Luther the great Reformer so eloquently stated, "my conscience is bound to the Word of God".

Now, let me say that I have seen these same names as "regulars" to this blog, I ask, "do you feel at home here?" If so, I find this sobering.

And yet, in spite of JD's attempts at refocusing there ends up a lot of distracting posts on a lot of nonsense. A lot of attacks, and folks sitting in silence looking to stir things up, including direct shots on Constance.

There are things going on out in the open that folks are generally blind to see. Many bite into the making things better for this world.

Makes you stop and wonder. Take note recently of Mohler's articles against Yoga. It brings him a great backlash. Have also seen in the non-christian world it brings the mockers to mocking as the continue to deny spiritual realities.

Mariel- it is possible to not believe in hell, it does not believe it exists. I have seen people take that position out of hurt. I have seen people take that position and walk a path leading to going off the path of God's truth. There is eternal punishment that we may well fail to fully grasp.

It seems to me the issue of Catholicism would rarely come up on this blog if it weren't for posters like Jaclyn and the anonymous troll who comes and posts disinformation about it every second or third thread.

You can't really blame the Catholic readers for responding to this kind of stuff. If they stayed silent it would be as though this misinformation was true.

Okay...what's the topic again? How do you go from the World Economic Forum to the Catholic Church? Is there some kind of connection between the two? This would at least tie the on-going discussion to the current topic.

If, whoever you are you anonymous, that insulted Constance as a "garbage bear," what are you doing waddling around here? The "garbage" she has uncovered happens to be a large worldwide conspiracy via the New Age Movement. The information regarding the World Economic Forum only highlights the fact that the New Age Movement continues to work towards its ultimate goals.

Jaclyn, Constance tolerates your Catholic-bashing comments along with all the pro-Catholic comments here. I have read your comments which is just non-stop Catholic-bashing. You spend almost your entire time on this blog saying these things (and not just on this particular thread). Constance hasn't changed her tolerance of pro-Catholic comments because of anything you have said. Can't you take a hint? You must have something to add in regards to the New Age Movement without resulting in Catholic-bashing.

Thanks, I did try to get things going back in the right direction. I even gave out some really good pieces, which seem to have fallen by the way side. I know it is bad when easy going David has had enough!

I also tried to post new information. Those who read here need to respond to the information posted in order to break up the hijacking of the thread by a troll. It's very possible the troll has really no interest in Christianity but merely wants to hijack the thread, boring those who come here for information on New Age.

10-10-10 today. SO the meetings and actions going from the world view of synchronistic, numerlogical nonesense they have attributed a lot of meaning to this day with varied global initiatives. In the meantime, here conversation has again denegrated to the back and forth of unrelated subject matters. It is usually one of two things. Bashing dorothy for being a Jew that does not recognize Jesus as messiah or the other option of bashing on all who are still part of Catholic church. Add in a shot or two for constance allowing them to share what they can to contribute.

Fact, this site is one that is important one of keeping an eye on the frames and schemes that are under way. It is a place for a cry to wake up.

Sure there is lots of speculation, particularly around Javier Solona and others, but it is worth being awake and alert and watching. There are many antichrists leading up to "The one" is is to come. There is much deception and falling away. So, please can we recognize that the devils schemes and lies are out there and let us move away from the pettiness and distractions. Cause guess what, God is at work regardless and either you seek after His truth, or follow the worlds ways.

This site does always point to truth of Jesus it is not like many sites out there who push and poitn out evil in world and have no grounding in The Truth.

Jaclyn... If it's any consolation, I've read through and I don't think your initial comments were bashing Catholics (a term which some frequently use here themselves) as if to give gravity to the fact that they think they are being insulted.

Lisa maybe new, but it hasn't taken her long to adopt the sarcastic tone of those like the Missing tOOTH Fairy et al.

The garbage bear comment really got to me! Especially, since I never heard that used as an insult before. I'm not trying to come down hard on Jaclyn or even chase her away. Jaclyn is going to believe what she does about the RCC and has taken a clear stance. Our Catholic posters have also made their stance very clear. These arguments that have plagued Christianity for centuries cannot possibly be solved here. That would take an entirely different blog.

"The Fethullah Gulen movement, which seeks to restore the Ottoman Empire, has found a friend and benefactor in Bill Gates of Microsoft fame. Mr. Gates is ranked the third wealthiest person on planet earth.

"In 2007, through the Texas High School Project, the Gates Foundation shelled out $10,550,000 to the Cosmos Foundation, a Gulen enterprise that operates 25 publicly funded charter schools in Texas.

"The Internal Revenue Service Form 990 for Cosmos shows that the Cosmos Foundation received $41,570,721 from taxpayers.

"At present, there are 85 Gulan madrassahs (Islamic schools) in the United States, and all operate with public funding." More at the link.

Keep in mind that the Gates Foundation is part of New Group of World Servers, a Lucis Trust branch.

I'm concerned about all the heretical movements in the church...I left my own church a few years ago because it was too "emergent".

Dear Constance, you have done much good work and at times trod a lonely path in your quest to expose dangerous doctrines, however, today, I find you a bundle of contradictions.

There are non-essentials we can agree to disagree on, however, the essentials are non-negotiable. Catholisism represents a vast departure from Scriptural essentials.

A Catholic can come to a Saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, but I believe the Holy Spirit (who leads us into to truth) will reveal the errors of this religion and lead one out, just like Rudi, who used to be a regular on this blog.

You see Constance, since last evening quite a few individuals put their two cents in, including Lisa, who calls into question the in-errency of Scripture, to all of these posts (including Lisa's) you say nothing, yet you took the time to insinuate I'm a Catholic basher. Wow, need I say more?

Dear Tooth Fairy, I am NOT interested in sending Catholics to hell. I have long felt Catholics have as much to offer as typical Protestants to the faith. The horrors enumerated by the anti-CAtholic troll yesterday are, however, probably true positions which the Church took in the l5th century, and still holds, I suspect, but I don't know...can Papal statements be reversed by the Church?

Protestants in the l5th century also burned people at the stake. That is historical. It was one hell of a century, probably the worst ever in Europe, and made many think the End of the World was at hand. Everyone burned everyone who disagreed with them.

My new conviction that Hell is not eternal has been held by many, and I suggest you read the final chapter of Joseph Herrin's book outlining all the people who believed that Hell was not eternal in the early church down to the present. It is an amazing list which should impresss both Catholics and Protestants. I am not a follower of Herrin, and disagree with him on some other issues, but I am amazed at the amount of suppression of this eternal Hell theory that has gone on in both Catholic and Protestant as well as secular institutions.

It is obvious that we suffer grievously here on Earth, and that this is most probably due to sin and our fallen nature. Our suffering is sufficiently grievous that we should not impute to God the idea that it is eternal.

Since a new universal religion will be erupting for the new global age, it is pertinent to consider how much terror will be in it. Both Muslim and fundamentalist Christianity threaten people with eternal hell if they disobey the dictates of the leaders. It is a terror cudgel used to keep people in line by sheer terror.

Tooth Fairy,I love the good parts of the Catholic church and some of my best memories are singing in Catholic choirs. Oh that these wonderful memories were the whole of it. Oh that Church would truly BE our mother.

P.S. If anyone wishes access to the book I mentioned in the previous blog, it is at wwwwHeart4God and it's called "God's Plan for the Ages". Very easy to read online, and just the final chapter will outline WHO thought what about the issue, and that their views were often suppressed.

I feel bad about being out here alone on this, but I do try to follow Spirit's prompting. He (God)is all I have.

This has to be one of the flimsiest arguments for anything I have EVER seen. So since Constance keeps tabs on a certain Spaniard, she is part of the conspiracy. You are taking this from a article that has little relevance to the accusation, A article which places as it's perpetrators members of the Christian right Constance has spoken out against?

A article which makes a ton of claims but offers no proof or sources? A article published by Lyndon Larouche? A man in bed with the globalists who has more than a degree of a shady past? This was so ridiculous I wouldn't have even responded to it had I not been afraid someone might take this seriously.

Mariel, The person who writing you are point to, do in fact point to the heretical doctrine of universal reconciliation. Now granted I have not done a full examination of the writing on the site, but wanted to catch the "gist" and as expected those that do not hold to an eternal "death" are either nihilist (may be some logic to that position) or Universal reconciiation. Now, gratned it is possible to hold the position and not turn back on rest of Gospel. I know folks that have come out of a great deal of harm and seen "hell" used for a bludgeon to control behaviors that have the hardest time. I have seen those focused on a particular imcompatibility even turn from faith upon facing great sorrow and tradgedy. Yet, my friend, Universal Reconciliation is in fact another Gospel, regardless of the position of hell. Also, Mariel, that site you pointed out already stood on bad ground as they used "Yashuha" as name for Jesus which has no Jewish or any grounding in reality as a name.

FYI, for those that feel a need to check out that site for self it is www.heart4god.ws (weird ending with the ws) There are tons of writings on the site and it would take a long time sorting out truth for the distortions there. From what I saw I cannot recommended or condone it.

I feel a little compelled to step in and give a little food for thought. The KJV of the Bible uses one word "Hell" to describe actually 2 places. The Bible describes a literal "Hades" as a temporary resting place for departed spirits, who are unbelievers. In the Old Testament it was considered "Abraham's Bosom" and it was originally where all spirts, righteous and unrighteous went. Most Christians believe that Jesus descended to Hades, and brought with him the righteous to then forever more live with him in Heaven. However the Greek word "Gehenna" describes what is better referred to as the Lake of Fire, which is the eternal resting place, after the judgment, of those whom God sends. It was the place prepared for the fallen angels, of which the antichrist and the false prophet are the first humans who will occupy it. It's a good idea to get a concordance and see which word each verse on Hell refers to, whether it was the temporary or eternal place.

Jaclyn,It is difficult to even communicate with you.Where, exactly, did I call into question the inerrancy of scripture? The Catholic Church gave the world the bible, there is nothing in the bible that contradicts the RCC and there is nothing within the RCC that contradicts the bible. Period.Go back and re-read my questions and you will see that what I am questioning is the protestant concept of "Sola-Scriptura". I suspect you know this, but cannot answer the questions(s).

You see Constance, since last evening quite a few individuals put their two cents in, including Lisa, who calls into question the in-errency of Scripture, to all of these posts (including Lisa's) you say nothing, yet you took the time to insinuate I'm a Catholic basher. Wow, need I say more?

Where did Lisa call into question the "inerrancy of Scripture?" Please explain exactly where she has done this. While you are doing so, please call into mind the commandment: thou shalt not bear false witness against they neighbor.

As Susanna has pointed out here many times, Sacred Scripture is one of the two pillars of the Catholic Rule of Faith.

Unless you can do so, your claims are known as "conclusory allegations." Should they turn out to be unsupported by the evidence, they would be properly known as "false allegations."

Further, as far as I know, Protestants cannot even agree amongst themselves on the meaning of the term "inerrancy of scripture" so while you are at it, please define your term.

That's nice for you that you think the Catholic religion departs from "scriptural essentials." Actually, the Roman Catholic religion is completely "scriptural":

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/

Many Protestants, including Protestant Evangelicals, have discovered this fact:

http://www.chnetwork.org/

In short, you are entitled to your feelings and views about Catholicism. So is everybody else here. But Catholics are equally entitled to their feelings about anti-Catholicism. But as Peacbringer said, this isn't really the subject of the blog.

Since you seem to think it is, however, and seem to have expertise about what is "true Christianity" and what is not, please provide a comprehensive list of all Protestant demoninations you personally find to adhere to "true Christianity" and those you find to be "unscriptural" and therefore false. And while you are at it, please show me where in the Bible it states that Protestant denominations of which you personally approve are faithful to Jesus Christ and those of which you personally disapprove are false. After all, if the Bible is self-interpreting and your sole source of truth, everything you write here on this blog should in theory be "provable" from that very Bible.

Better yet, answer all these questions on a new blog of your own and give us the link.

This isn't really the forum for this kind of debate, though I realize that the troll started it!:-) But since we're already way off topic let me just say that there are many Catholic websites that argue the Catholic position and there are also many Protestant websites that argue for sola scritura. In case you or anyone else is interested in answers to your questions from a protestant perspective, see http://carm.org/bible-alone-sufficient-spiritual-truth or a bit more technically at http://www.equip.org/articles/a-defense-of-sola-scriptura or in great LONNNG detail at http://vintage.aomin.org/SANTRAN.html

there are many Catholic websites that argue the Catholic position and there are also many Protestant websites that argue for sola scritura.

Exactly - thanks for that, Rosa.

Now wouldn't it be nice if here on this blog we could go for at least a few weeks without someone out of the blue, like Jaclyn, complaining about how Catholicism is a false, heretical religion.

If Catholics engaged in similar behavior -- i.e. came here on a regular basis and did the same (put forth unprovoked attacks on the Protestant faith) they would be criticised vehemently, and rightly so. Yet when Protestants like Jaclyn do the same, there is usually a conspiracy of silence around this from this blog's Protestant participants, signalling approval.

To my Protestant brethren out there who have the courage to object publicly to antics like Jaclyn's (as opposed to the majority, who tolerate this practice by remaining silent): thank you. Should a Catholic come here and engage in the same type of antics, you have my word that I will stand up on your behalf also.

Yes, it is clear that this blogspot has for far too long, attempted through insults and disparaging of persons, hoped to crush the Christian voice that exposes the evils of Roman Catholicism.

Reading through the threads, there have even been Catholics here who have woken up to expose the corruption of that Vatican establishment that previously had so bewitched them. Even they, probably with loved ones still trapped in the cult of R.Cism have been villified as being Anti-Catholic as in against the very people trapped in that awful establishment, rather than being viewed in light of their comments, which are overwhelmingly focused upon exposing the Vatican & Roman Catholicism and certainly ont in berating Catholics. Yet, I am sorry to say that even those with no Catholic background whatsoever have joined in with the stone-throwing. No free-speech here, is their unspoken dictum!

Do none of you get it that many of such persons probably posted with tears rolling down their faces at the thought of offending people with whom they have great compassion, having themselves once been caught up in such themselves?

You should be ashamed of yourselves, not the said posters, as much as anyone should be who posts Anti-Catholic threads, in terms of attacking people, rather than Anti-Catholicism threads.

Lisa, the RC Church did not give the World the Holy Bible, God through his Prophets & Apostles did! It was then disseminated amongst Christians long before the RC CHurch came into existence by Pagan Constantine. The RC Church has been responsible for witholding the Holy Bible from millions! Remember that evil man, now regarded as the Patron St. of Lawyers under the NWO, Thomas Moore, he was no saint! A mass-murder, a Saint-killer, & a Bible burner was what he was! (Sometimes there is a just reason to point to an individual. This is such a case, as it highlights the evils of Roman Catholicism, and doesn't attack all Catholic people per se)

Let people have a free voice and true debate without shouting them down as bigots. Be intellectually honest!

Yeah, but this blog isn't necessarily about exposing the evils of the RCC. With an exception regarding the RCC (or any Christian denomination) and the New Age Movement. Now, how about that World Economic Forum thing...global government is on its way.

IMF, Donor Partners, and Recipient Countries Pledge Contributions of US$21.5 Million to Support the Middle East Regional Technical Assistance Center

The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Commission, France, Kuwait, Oman, as well as the Middle East Regional Technical Assistance Center (METAC) beneficiary countries—Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Libya, Syria, Sudan, and Yemen—pledged to contribute US$21.5 million to METAC during a pledging session held in Washington DC today. The pledges received cover about two thirds of the center’s requirements for its third phase of operation, which runs from May 2010 to April 2015. Discussions are ongoing with a number of other donors who have also expressed interest in contributing to METAC.The center, which is located in Beirut (Lebanon), provides technical assistance and training to Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Sudan, the West Bank and Gaza and Yemen, with a focus on banking supervision, public debt management, revenue administration, public financial management, and macroeconomic statistics.

This blog, David, refuses to address the origins of the New Age. It denies the Illuminati function (were they ever REALLY Anti-Jesuit? or REALLY JESUITS!)

haven't you heard of Teilhard de Chardin? Haven't you seen the pope JPII kissing the Koran? Do you not know, that after Babylon & Egypt, the next major establishment to use the symbol of the pyramid with the all-seeing eye is the Roman Catholic institution? Look at some early jesuit books, google image all-seeing eye Aachen Cathedral, there are hundreds to search of course!

Haven't you seen the video where GW Bush is hailed at a Catholic Conference as the 1st Catholic President? A deliberate dig at JFK of course! Do you not know that non-Catholics are not permitted to take the Eucharist? So then why are there pics & docs showing Bill Clinton, GW Bush & Laura taking it, amongst others?

Check out Cardinal Egan & Politicians. This site deals with piece-meal, lots of it very informative, however piecemeal in itself is aimed to keep you from looking at the bigger picture.

Don't you know about the Red Mass & the Blue Mass? What about 'St.' Thomas More in connection with lawyers & Politicians, and the links shown between the Vatican & the NWO. Heard of P2? The SMOM with its freemasonic style titles & rites? That the Vatican is trying to establish itself firmly in Israel, where Ignatius Lie-ola tried first to establish the Jesuits? There's much more... check it out, and look up Catholic Ultra(s) if you can find anything. Do not use google search engine, look in scholarly docs... etc!

At the moment she's sitting quite comfortably upon the beast, saying, I am queen...

You have supporters out here. This is the same old thing occurring over and over on this blog. i have stated that the RCC is loaded with new age principles and actions only to be treated as you have. Keep your head up.

Side note: at my mother's funeral two weeks ago, I looked around at the church I grew up in (am no longer a member)and noticed that there were many IMAGES of Mary, many more than of Christ (which is also forbidden) actually there was one of Christ and five of Mary, but most disgusting was the image of Mary in a bridal gown holding baby with dollar bills attached.

Well said 10:20 AM, yes Jaclyn don't be disheartened, I (Anon 10:18 am also a former Roman Catholic) You have spoken courageously, and I'm sure out of love.

You probably won't find that love in this blogspot reciprocated, but let that encourage and spur you on to really research things for yourself, prayerfully & in light of Scripture, & trusting the Holy Spirit to guide you, and expose darkness wherever you find it.

To add, nor am I, in terms of being anti-person for the sake of what they or others label them[selves] as, eg, Jesuits, Masons, Muslims etc, but I am wholeheartedly against their principles and institutions, and will expose such accordingly! There does, with regards individuals, come a time for exposing, rebuking, and correcting, and warning others.

This is not because I hate the said individuals, I love them and want them to renounce their wickedness, and turn to Jesus Christ and be saved, it is because I hate what they are promoting, and that they are leading the flock astray.

Also, with regards the pyramid and all-seeing eye, yes this can be seen in pagan nations, in one form or another, throughout the World, but with regards the West, post-Roman, it is seen at its earliest point as being adopted by the Roman Catholic Church. After jesuit intrusion into Russia, it can also be seen heavily in Orthodox circles too.

Voltaire = trained by jesuits; Weishaupt = trained by jesuits, professor of Canon Law, at the Jesuit University of Ingolstadt. (As far as I have discovered, Jesuits continued to be protected in this part of Bavaria.(despite the Papal Bull in 1773 banning them by later-poisoned Clement XIV)

Perhaps the Jesuit General thought, what greater way for jesuits to continue their movement and vindicate themselves even if they must seem to be anti-jesuitical and even if some must be sacrificed. That's sure how it looks when one thoroughly examines their oath and Anti-Reformation history.

Beware of Mr. Phelps, he comes across as Anti-Catholic (as in people), not just Anti-Catholicism. He also comes across strongly as racist and of the 'white-supremacy' variety. I would not be surprised if he indeed is a jesuit decoy. A ploy to stop people exposing Jesuitism & RCism, for when they see some of his odious statements, they stop researching and throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak.

I am anon 10:20 and applaud you for being courageous and speaking out. Did you notice the one response to me? No dear.... and ad nauseum? These are also very common on this blog. I mentioned some time ago that many regulars on this blog, while sharing some very valuable info, are knee deep in the very things they are trying to expose. And they don't even know it!

The majority of attacks in this area have been aimed at silencing those who expose Roman Catholicism and who are not attacking Catholics per se on the basis of them being members of that RC institution! The attacks majorily been from those whose, understandably though not justifiably, defense mechanisms set in, and from others who haven't got a clue, to silence any exposure of that wicked institution.

Therefore your assertion, "Catholics are attacked", is in the vast majority of cases here, a strawman. I repeat, it is, in the vast majority of cases, Roman Catholicism that is rightly questioned and exposed, and NOT attacks on Catholics [purely on the basis of them being Roman Catholics] your first premise therefore FAILS, and your second therefore, in the vast majority of cases, has no justifiable foundation.

P.S., 11:17 AM, when you state 'you Anti-Catholics', do you mena those of us who are Anti-Catholic in terms of its disseminations, doctrine, teaching, and estabishment as a whole, [i.e. Anti-Catholicism] or do you mean Anti-Catholic as in being against Roman Catholics on the basis that they are Roman Catholics? If you mean the former, you have some justification in your pronounced appelation, if you mean the latter, then for most of us and in most cases you are most definitely wrong, and attempting, knowingly or not, to create smoke & mirrors, to keep people silent and stop others finding truth!

Lisa,Please find a response to the first 3 questions you put to Jaclyn at 7:39PM:

1) Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?

Jesus said His Spirit will lead into all truth and thus His Scripture is true since the Spirit led his people collectively into all truth providing us with one book, one book containing Scripture that describes itself as God-breathed and profitable in that it makes the man of God complete, fully equipped for every good work: (doctrine, rebuke, reproof, training in righteousness etc. 2 Tim. 3:16-17).

2) Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, where did Jesus tell His apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book?

The apostles didn't compile all of their writings into a book so the question is based on error.

3) Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book?

The apostles told people that the Scriptures are God-breathed and profitable in the sense that they make the man of God COMPLETE, fully equipped for EVERY good work. Since Jesus studied the Scriptures as a boy, as Luke 2:45-47, it means he supported the Scripture in its book form and studied it. It assumes this would happen and be appropriate for the life and teachings of Jesus since Jesus is more important than Moses and the prophets. So in essence, God said His word is what makes people fully equipped for doctrine, his word was collected into one book as was regular procedure which Jesus supported, his word, which contains prophecy thus authenticating itself, says His Spirit leads his people to all truth and thus the word is self authenticating since the Spirit, fulfilling the prophecy and authoritative truth of the word, led His people to accept one book.

Since the books of the Bible constituting both the Old and the New Testament were determined solely by the authority of the Catholic Church, without the Church there would have been no Bible, and hence no Protestantism. The Catholic Church is therefore the one central fact in the religious history of Christendom.

The Catholic Church did not come into existence under Constantine. I pray for you that you can let go of your anger and hatred of the RCC long enough to do your own intellectually honest research and understand the truth. But for now, I am embarrassed for you!

Constance,I do apologize for participating in the "off-track" commentary on your blog. I visit this site because I think it is the best source of information on the "new-age" movement - and the regulars who post comments are very savvy and are also excellent sources of information. However, when my faith is attacked I see it as my duty to defend it. And when people are posting blatantly untrue and hateful comments I see it as a disservice to everyone if they are allowed to go unchallenged. But then we get off track...From now on I will just pray for them as nothing I say will open their minds when they are determined to hold onto their hate.Thank you for all that you do!Lisa

"All the 27 books of the New Testament were in full circulation since 100 AD, the majority by 70 AD."

http://www.bible.ca/b-canon-earliest-evidence.htm

I could find more, but this is a 1 minute search.

The old Testament was already in full circulation in the Hebrew & Greek, well before Constantine established Roman Catholicism. Yes, Jerome did translate it into the Latin Vulgate, which because of the domination of the RC Church and its persecution of any Christian not being under its authority, was majorily the version followed by clergy. [Yes, also well before the reformation; the RC Crusaders murdered many Christians in the Middle East, not just Muslims & Jews! ; And later, but before the reformation, we have the Waldenses [In France called Voudois, amonst others, persecuted too. And, anyone who translated the Bible either from Greek or Latin, into the vernacular, was burned along with their translations by the RC Church.]

Your notion of the Roman Catholic Church, [The Church of Rome had a Bishop, no more senior than that of Antioch, Alexandria, or others, and this was not the Roman Catholic Church with its Pope and mixture] being before Constantine is based on tradition which is not borne out by history and factual evidence. Can you not see past your tradition, and honestly view historical truth and fact?

Also Lisa, your appeal to Constance appears as a vieled ultimatum, which no doubt will win out on this blogspot as it is a well-tried and succesful method of silencing those who will speak the truth regards the heresies of Rome. The apparent veiled ultimatum being, "stop free-speech on this subject, or I & other Catholics will leave", yet, whether you intend this or not, it has the desired effect of being a lever to raise the shutters on whistle-blowers & bring down the wrath of regulars upon them.

This is un-Christian, un-American, and unnecessary, not the exposing of the NAM & NWO grassroots of the RC Institution

In addition, there is no Holy Scriptural evidence, nor any form of writings concurrent with or immediately following the writing down of the Holy Scriptures, which lend credence to this legend of Roman Catholicism, in fact, the legend can be regarded by the honest researcher of Church history as nothing more than myth.

There is also ample evidence to show that St. Peter's tomb has been discovered in Israel! Of course, immediately AFTER this discovery, the Vatican issued a photo of part of an engraving, in Greek [which read 'Petrus', or there abouts] allegedly, though without further evidence from the tomb [purporting to be that] of Peter, beneath the Vatican. Quelle Suprise!

On the issue of whether Peter or Christ is the Rock, I've learned that even Augustine declared the Rock refers to Jesus Christ and not to Peter!

The Holy Father is the Name of our Holy Father in Heaven & is not to be blasphemously given to a said pope! Only God is infallible in Faith & Morals, [as of course God is infallible in everything], not the pope! It does not wash to declare anything anomolous pertaining to this in terms of a pope to then declare said-pope as Anti-Pope! Popes are, by definition, Anti-Bishop of Rome, I'll grant that.

The truth is, as far as Holy Scripture & the earliest Church History goes, that St. Peter never even went to Rome. According to the early documents he was Bishop of Antioch, not Rome!

In addition, there is no Holy Scriptural evidence, nor any form of writings concurrent with or immediately following the writing down of the Holy Scriptures, which lend credence to this legend of Roman Catholicism, in fact, the legend can be regarded by the honest researcher of Church history as nothing more than myth.

There is also ample evidence to show that St. Peter's tomb has been discovered in Israel! Of course, immediately AFTER this discovery, the Vatican issued a photo of part of an engraving, in Greek [which read 'Petrus', or there abouts] allegedly, though without further evidence from the tomb [purporting to be that] of Peter, beneath the Vatican. Quelle Suprise!

On the issue of whether Peter or Christ is the Rock, I've learned that even Augustine declared the Rock refers to Jesus Christ and not to Peter!

The Holy Father is the Name of our Holy Father in Heaven & is not to be blasphemously given to a said pope! Only God is infallible in Faith & Morals, [as of course God is infallible in everything], not the pope! It does not wash to declare anything anomolous pertaining to this in terms of a pope to then declare said-pope as Anti-Pope! Popes are, by definition, Anti-Bishop of Rome, I'll grant that.

Mary, blessed amongst women, is not to be insulted with the pagan epithet of 'Queen of Heaven', such is of pagan origin, the idol of Babylon, Istra, which when the Jews went astray after her were kindled God's wrath for their spiritual fornication & adultery.

Jeremiah 7

17 Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem?

18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces?

20 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched.

17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

18 But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

19 And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men?

20 Then Jeremiah said unto all the people, to the men, and to the women, and to all the people which had given him that answer, saying,

21 The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, ye, and your fathers, your kings, and your princes, and the people of the land, did not the LORD remember them, and came it not into his mind?

22 So that the LORD could no longer bear, because of the evil of your doings, and because of the abominations which ye have committed; therefore is your land a desolation, and an astonishment, and a curse, without an inhabitant, as at this day.

23 Because ye have burned incense, and because ye have sinned against the LORD, and have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, nor walked in his law, nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies; therefore this evil is happened unto you, as at this day.

24 Moreover Jeremiah said unto all the people, and to all the women, Hear the word of the LORD, all Judah that are in the land of Egypt:

25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.

26 Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth.

27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all the men of Judah that are in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine, until there be an end of them.

28 Yet a small number that escape the sword shall return out of the land of Egypt into the land of Judah, and all the remnant of Judah, that are gone into the land of Egypt to sojourn there, shall know whose words shall stand, mine, or their's.

The information contained on the webpage to which I've provided the link below, utterly and Biblically refutes the Roman Catholic notion of transsubstantiation. I suggest you read it carefully before making a response.

and so the onslaught continues...JD- thanks for IMF info...folks really rather get all worked up over what is being deluged on the blog rather than the matter at hand.

Tell you what folks and trolls, are directive is always to speak truth in love. Change does happen by an avanlanche of material but working of the Holy Spirit. There is no "clean" part of the body of Christ. Please folks look over the material JD has posted and CC has referenced if you have not.

You people who despise the Roman Catholic religion so much....I will dedicate my Rosary to you tonight.

Now has someone thought of starting a blog called CCTRCFTMFMT? (That stands for "Constance Cumbey tolerates Roman Catholicism Far Too Much for My Taste").

You could all congregate over there and have lots of nice discussions amongst yourself. You could invite Bob Mitchell to be a guest blogger. Rudi, Joyce, Suzette, and Gretchen might even drop in for a pow-wow now and then.

The attacks on the Catholic Church here parallel those on the Catholic Church done by the Nazi movement. The Catholic Church has been a target of the New Age movement. H. G. Wells wrote Crux Ansata during WWII. Wells goes all the way back to the start of the Fabian movement. Wells also wrote The Open Conspiracy which showed how the World State was coming to fruition. Operating through religion was one way to bring about the conspiracy.Only not religion that is powerful and opposed to paganism. Rather the fractured Protestant movement which has been easier to infiltrate.

So, why the effort to bring down the Catholic Church? It's because the Catholic Church has organization, power and a moral code that stands in the way of those who plan the one world government.

The Catholic church like all organizations composed of humans with their weaknesses isn't perfect, but overall it has done much good.

The troll here is putting in a lot of effort. The question is why.

One, it distracts from the goal of this blog which is to expose the New Age movement.

Two, Let's cut the lie that the poster is only doing this out of love for his fellowman, keeping them from deception. Knowing that there are many readers of this blog, he/she is smearing the Catholics in order to put doubt in their heads.

Yes, the troll is involved in New Age thinking. He/she is on it's side.

Your characterizations about the Rosary and intercession as taught by the Roman Catholic Church are wholly inaccurate and false. Next thing you will probably come back and write, "the Pope thinks he is infallible and can do no wrong."

The general lack of basic education among many of the Protestants who post here at this blog really beggars belief sometimes. So is the moral character of some of you, case in point being Jaclyn, who puts words into the mouth of Lisa on this very thread -- expressly violating the commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Since we are on the subject here of what is and is not "Biblical" I have noticed over the years that some Protestants are very "selective" about which rules in the Bible and how the "interpret" certain very clear passages.

One of the biggest eye-openers for me was a woman who used to run youth programs at my church many years ago. She decided she wanted to get divorced, so she did. Shortly thereafter, she got a nwe boyfriend and decided she wanted to get married again, to someone else. Our priest told her no, she could not do that within the church, she would have to go down to City Hall.

She ran off all indignant to one of her neighbors who was a pastor in the Evangelical Free Church. He told her that the Catholic Church was "unbiblical" and that the Holy Spirit had sent her to a community of real Christians. He also told her it was not against the Bible to get remarried. She told me all this with self-satisfied glee. And then she left my church and joined his church.

A few years later that marriage broke down. She got divorced and got a new boyfriend. She went and married the new boyfriend.

The question remains, what part of Luke 16:18 did this Protestant pastor not understand?

Thanks for that very important reminder. No one apart from Constance knows this history like you do.

You have posted these history lessons before but perhaps you have not done so often enough, or in enough detail, because it is very easy to lose sight of them. If you want evidence of how easy, all one needs to do is take a look at this thread.

You have certainly taught me over the years that it is impossible to understand the workings of the New Age movement today when you sever it from its history, especially during its most diabolical apex, that of the Nazi Era.

Your biased link that you say "utterly and Biblically refutes the Roman Catholic notion of transubstantiation" also utterly and complrtely ignores the old testament of the bible. Did you notice this? Or is the Old Testament irrelevant to you?

Here is a better link for you:http://www.osv.com/OSV4MeNav/Sacraments/TheEucharist/BiblicalEvidence/tabid/499/Default.aspx

To "a former catholic"You really believe that the bible was bound and in full circulation in 100 AD? The printing press wasn't even invented until the 1500s. How were the books chosen? I am sure there were thousands of writings (papyrus, scrolls, etc.). Use your intelligence, I know it's in there!

I was a catholic for over half my life, an altar boy for eight years, attended catholic school for twelve years, all my family is catholic including nieces, nephews, aunts, uncles etc. I defended the church with tireless effort well into my twenties. I have studied catholic doctrine ALL of my life by living it, practicing it and researching. So, I don't need you or anyone else here to enlighten me as if to teach me what I am wrong about. The rosary is vain repetition, plain and simple. It does invoke intercession from someone other than Jesus (or maybe my english is all of a sudden out the window when it comes to comprehending the words to "hail mary")

Jaclyn and The Former Catholic are the ones I really respect here today.

A wingnut is a very useful piece of hardware, used to hold things together. It has wings that make it very useful when put in action. Without a wingnut in the right place, things can fall apart. I understand the person who first developed them got the inspiration from the picture of an angel.

I was a catholic for over half my life, an altar boy for eight years, attended catholic school for twelve years, all my family is catholic including nieces, nephews, aunts, uncles etc. I defended the church with tireless effort well into my twenties. I have studied catholic doctrine ALL of my life by living it, practicing it and researching. So, I don't need you or anyone else here to enlighten me as if to teach me what I am wrong about. The rosary is vain repetition, plain and simple. It does invoke intercession from someone other than Jesus (or maybe my english is all of a sudden out the window when it comes to comprehending the words to "hail mary")

Jaclyn and The Former Catholic are the ones I really respect here today"

Jesus quoted the Old Testament.Jesus didn't quote Socrates, Plato or Aristotle.Jesus never quoted Confucious,or Lau Tsu.He only quoted and he very oftenquoted the Holy Scriptures; that is;The Torah and the Prophets, (with the Psalms being considered Prophetic.)Jesus quoted the Torah and The Prophets, or paraphrased them,you might almost say, continually.That's all I need to know.I'd call it "Sola Scriptura,"but that term is a term meant to create controversy and division.I don't really even care what SolaScriptura means, and I don't speak Latin anyway.The fact that Jesus didn't quote anything but Holy Scripture is all I need to know.

Jesus was a Sola Scriptura kind of Son of God.

After all, he is the "Author and finisher of the faith"

Every Prophet in the OT is a type of Jesus. Every single Prophet of the eternal Holy Scriptures is showing us the Messiah; the Christ, The Anointed One of Jacob.That's because every Prophet of the O.T. was given each and every word to write down BY JESUS.Jesus said: "Before Abraham was,I AM.

"This book of the Law shall not depart out of your mouth; but youshall meditate thereon day and night, that you may observe to doaccording to all that is written therein;for then you shall succeed and prosper."_Joshua 1:8

Jesus quoted the Old Testament.Jesus didn't quote Socrates, Plato or Aristotle.Jesus never quoted Confucious,or Lau Tsu.He only quoted and he very oftenquoted the Holy Scriptures; that is;The Torah and the Prophets, (with the Psalms being considered Prophetic.)Jesus quoted the Torah and The Prophets, or paraphrased them,you might almost say, continually.That's all I need to know.I'd call it "Sola Scriptura,"but that term is a term meant to create controversy and division.I don't really even care what SolaScriptura means, and I don't speak Latin anyway.The fact that Jesus didn't quote anything but Holy Scripture is all I need to know.

Jesus was a Sola Scriptura kind of Son of God.

After all, he is the "Author and finisher of the faith"

Every Prophet in the OT is a type of Jesus. Every single Prophet of the eternal Holy Scriptures is showing us the Messiah; the Christ, The Anointed One of Jacob.That's because every Prophet of the O.T. was given each and every word to write down BY JESUS.Jesus said: "Before Abraham was,I AM.

"This book of the Law shall not depart out of your mouth; but youshall meditate thereon day and night, that you may observe to doaccording to all that is written therein;for then you shall succeed and prosper."_Joshua 1:8

This is like become a group therapy session for former Catholics. I'm guessing none of you are Notre Dame fans. By the way this year is the best opportunity for my alma mater (Western Michigan University) to actually beat Notre Dame in football. If Notre Dame loses, they really need to fix their football program.

Jesus quoted the Old Testament.Jesus didn't quote Socrates, Plato or Aristotle.Jesus never quoted Confucious,or Lau Tsu.He only quoted and he very oftenquoted the Holy Scriptures; that is;The Torah and the Prophets, (with the Psalms being considered Prophetic.)Jesus quoted the Torah and The Prophets, or paraphrased them,you might almost say, continually.That's all I need to know.I'd call it "Sola Scriptura,"but that term is a term meant to create controversy and division.I don't really even care what SolaScriptura means, and I don't speak Latin anyway.The fact that Jesus didn't quote anything but Holy Scripture is all I need to know.

Jesus was a Sola Scriptura kind of Son of God.

After all, he is the "Author and finisher of the faith"

Every Prophet in the OT is a type of Jesus. Every single Prophet of the eternal Holy Scriptures is showing us the Messiah; the Christ, The Anointed One of Jacob.That's because every Prophet of the O.T. was given each and every word to write down BY JESUS.Jesus said: "Before Abraham was,I AM.

"This book of the Law shall not depart out of your mouth; but youshall meditate thereon day and night, that you may observe to doaccording to all that is written therein;for then you shall succeed and prosper."_Joshua 1:8

George Soros, the billionaire financier who was an energetic Democratic donor in the last several election cycles but is sitting this one out, is not feeling optimistic about Democratic prospects.

“I made an exception getting involved in 2004,” Mr. Soros, 80, said in a brief interview Friday at a forum sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee, which promotes understanding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

“And since I didn’t succeed in 2004, I remained engaged in 2006 and 2008. But I’m basically not a party man. I’d just been forced into that situation by what I considered the excesses of the Bush administration.”

Mr. Soros, a champion of liberal causes, has been directing his money to groups that work on health care and the environment, rather than electoral politics. Asked if the prospect of Republican control of one or both houses of Congress concerned him, he said: “It does, because I think they are pushing the wrong policies, but I’m not in a position to stop it. I don’t believe in standing in the way of an avalanche.”

Jesus quoted the Old Testament.Jesus didn't quote Socrates, Plato or Aristotle.Jesus never quoted Confucious,or Lau Tsu.He only quoted and he very oftenquoted the Holy Scriptures; that is;The Torah and the Prophets, (with the Psalms being considered Prophetic.)Jesus quoted the Torah and The Prophets, or paraphrased them,you might almost say, continually.That's all I need to know.I'd call it "Sola Scriptura,"but that term is a term meant to create controversy and division.I don't really even care what SolaScriptura means, and I don't speak Latin anyway.The fact that Jesus didn't quote anything but Holy Scripture is all I need to know.

Jesus was a Sola Scriptura kind of Son of God.

After all, he is the "Author and finisher of the faith"

Every Prophet in the OT is a type of Jesus. Every single Prophet of the eternal Holy Scriptures is showing us the Messiah; the Christ, The Anointed One of Jacob.That's because every Prophet of the O.T. was given each and every word to write down BY JESUS.Jesus said: "Before Abraham was,I AM.

"This book of the Law shall not depart out of your mouth; but youshall meditate thereon day and night, that you may observe to doaccording to all that is written therein;for then you shall succeed and prosper."_Joshua 1:8

The dollar should be replaced with a global currency, the United Nations has said, proposing the biggest overhaul of the world's monetary system since the Second World War.

Sept., 2009

In a radical report, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has said the system of currencies and capital rules which binds the world economy is not working properly, and was largely responsible for the financial and economic crises.

It added that the present system, under which the dollar acts as the world's reserve currency , should be subject to a wholesale reconsideration.

Although a number of countries, including China and Russia, have suggested replacing the dollar as the world's reserve currency, the UNCTAD report is the first time a major multinational institution has posited such a suggestion.

In essence, the report calls for a new Bretton Woods-style system of managed international exchange rates, meaning central banks would be forced to intervene and either support or push down their currencies depending on how the rest of the world economy is behaving.

The proposals would also imply that surplus nations such as China and Germany should stimulate their economies further in order to cut their own imbalances, rather than, as in the present system, deficit nations such as the UK and US having to take the main burden of readjustment.

"Replacing the dollar with an artificial currency would solve some of the problems related to the potential of countries running large deficits and would help stability," said Detlef Kotte, one of the report's authors. "But you will also need a system of managed exchange rates. Countries should keep real exchange rates [adjusted for inflation] stable. Central banks would have to intervene and if not they would have to be told to do so by a multilateral institution such as the International Monetary Fund."

The proposals, included in UNCTAD's annual Trade and Development Report , amount to the most radical suggestions for redesigning the global monetary system.

Although many economists have pointed out that the economic crisis owed more to the malfunctioning of the post-Bretton Woods system, until now no major institution, including the G20 , has come up with an alternative.

The dollar should be replaced with a global currency, the United Nations has said, proposing the biggest overhaul of the world's monetary system since the Second World War.

Sept., 2009

In a radical report, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has said the system of currencies and capital rules which binds the world economy is not working properly, and was largely responsible for the financial and economic crises.

It added that the present system, under which the dollar acts as the world's reserve currency , should be subject to a wholesale reconsideration.

Although a number of countries, including China and Russia, have suggested replacing the dollar as the world's reserve currency, the UNCTAD report is the first time a major multinational institution has posited such a suggestion.

In essence, the report calls for a new Bretton Woods-style system of managed international exchange rates, meaning central banks would be forced to intervene and either support or push down their currencies depending on how the rest of the world economy is behaving.

The proposals would also imply that surplus nations such as China and Germany should stimulate their economies further in order to cut their own imbalances, rather than, as in the present system, deficit nations such as the UK and US having to take the main burden of readjustment.

"Replacing the dollar with an artificial currency would solve some of the problems related to the potential of countries running large deficits and would help stability," said Detlef Kotte, one of the report's authors. "But you will also need a system of managed exchange rates. Countries should keep real exchange rates [adjusted for inflation] stable. Central banks would have to intervene and if not they would have to be told to do so by a multilateral institution such as the International Monetary Fund."

The proposals, included in UNCTAD's annual Trade and Development Report , amount to the most radical suggestions for redesigning the global monetary system.

Although many economists have pointed out that the economic crisis owed more to the malfunctioning of the post-Bretton Woods system, until now no major institution, including the G20 , has come up with an alternative.

Michio Kaku (the latest incarnation of Carl Sagan) has been pushing the agenda of welcoming 'our space brothers' when they arrive. He was talking on a UK programme and mentioned the Age of Aquarius as well. It's so blatant.

Sorry to go off topic, but I think it's all connected. Based on your research, Constance - how close do you think we are to the transforming event - whether it be economic collapse, 3rd world war or Maitreya-type event?

It is a matter of history that when the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight Eisenhower, found the victims of the death camps he ordered all possible photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead.

He did this because he said in words to this effect:

'Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened'

This week, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offends' the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet.. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

It is now more than 60 years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the,6 million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians, and 1,900 Catholic priests Who were 'murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated' while the German people looked the other way!

Now, more than ever, with Iran , among others, claiming the Holocaust to be ?a myth,' it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.....

George Soros, the billionaire financier who was an energetic Democratic donor in the last several election cycles but is sitting this one out, is not feeling optimistic about Democratic prospects.

“I made an exception getting involved in 2004,” Mr. Soros, 80, said in a brief interview Friday at a forum sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee, which promotes understanding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.....read more.....

The raison D'etre of the Bretton Woods Conferences was to make decisions on global currency systems.

While reading the following articles, we might want to recall the information on the new default currency being proposed called the "Terra" which is based on the carbon standard instead of the gold standard.

It seems to me that this begs the question concerning the issue of whether or not a "Bretton Woods III" might be convened with a view to changing the global default currency - at least in part - to the Terra.

HOUSTON — State-owned Chinese energy giant CNOOC is buying a multibillion-dollar stake in 600,000 acres of South Texas oil and gas fields, potentially testing the political waters for further expansion into U.S. energy reserves. With the announcement Monday that it would pay up to $2.2 billion for a one-third stake in Chesapeake Energy assets, CNOOC lays claim to a share of properties that eventually could produce up to half a million barrels a day of oil equivalent.

It also might pick up some American know-how about tapping the hard-to-get deposits trapped in dense shale rock formations, analysts said.

As part of the deal, the largest purchase of an interest in U.S. energy assets by a Chinese company, CNOOC has agreed to pay about $1.1 billion for a chunk of Chesapeake’s assets in the Eagle Ford, a broad oil and gas formation that runs largely from southwest of San Antonio to the Mexican border.

CNOOC also will provide up to $1.1 billion more to cover drilling costs.

The deal represents China’s second try at making a big move into the U.S. oil and gas market, following a failed bid five years ago to buy California-based Unocal Corp.....read more....

Let us not forget that he and his new best friend Strobe Talbott at the Brookings Institute recently attended a meeting at Yalta. Interestingly, it has been reported that the Russians would like the new default global currency to be the Ruble.

......The US-China currency dispute is a symptom of the non-system of international monetary relations. Fighting the cause of the dispute rather than dealing with the symptom is the way forward. If the Obama Administration were to apply its New Philosophy to the international monetary system and start considering its transformation by basing it on a carbon-based monetary standard, the dispute would be resolved and the world would become a very different place. The Institute’s Tierra Land of 2025 scenario spells out this new world together with the social processes that make this Great Monetary Transition possible. It proposes that nations pass a UN General Assembly resolution to establish the UN Commission of Experts on Monetary Transformation and Low Carbon, Climate-resilient Development that submit its Monetary Plan of Climate Action via the UN FCCC to the Rio 2012 Earth Summit where monetary global governance would become part of its global economic and environmental governance. In preparation of that Commission the IIMT has started to organize international professional working groups that are doing the research, education and action needed to have the world transition from the non-system in international monetary relations to a carbon-based international monetary system which being glue (Eichengreen 2008) would bind together and transform the global financial, economic and commercial systems....read entire article...

http://www.timun.net/blog/post.php?i=98______________________________

IMHO, globally embracing the Terra (a.k.a. Tierra) based on the carbon standard could very well open the door wider to one world governemnt.

Spot on reporting as always! It has been my contention that the traditional idea of a basket currency will be shot down over fears that a small handful of currencies are just too unstable to support the worlds economy. The rising debt crisis may seal the deal on this one.

Instead something with intrinsic value outside of paper money may be sought. Something that the value of can be controlled more easily than wavering markets or a nations debt management policies. Carbon answers all of these calls as well as accomplishing the "green goals".

I have said it before, the Tierra/Terra is cap and trade on steroids and amphetamines. In other words, it is the perfect vehicle for the globalists. I am still not sure if the change to this direction will be all at once, but am absolutely certain that such is a desired end result.

Where did Former Catholic write it was through the printing press? Research! Do you think that Christians in the latter of the 1st & 2nd Centuries really did not have the full 27 books of the New Testament in circulation?

Stop denying history, I would suggest you use your intelligence but you are obviously deluded with a seared conscience to boot!

P.S., which part of the following passages from the 10 Commandments do you not understand?

Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Peacebringer, I already said that I am not a follower of the doctrines of Joseph Herrin. I just found his listing of those throughout history who did not believe Hell was eternal was surprising. And probably accurate, because he is a conscientious writer, even though I disagree with some basics of his thoughts.

And the person who suggested that I should look within and see WHICH Spirit was inspiring me, remember that Jesus said that people would claim that His inspiration was of the Devil. It may be hard in Satan's world to know which is prompting one, Satan or Jesus. But that is our FAITH, that we are following Jesus in spite of the subterfuges of Satan. If we call on the name of Jesus, we will receive guidance, even if it takes a while sometimes.

And I agree, Peacebringer, that using the name Yashua for Jesus is not always a good idea. Too much Judaizing?

Gosh so hard to be a Christian, so many rules to follow.

Follow the MAIN one, to love God with all your heart and to love others as yourself. And don't hate yourself and negate the latter. We have been taught to hate our selves.

Anonymous, "you wrote at 3:50 To "a former catholic"You really believe that the bible was bound and in full circulation in 100 AD? The printing press wasn't even invented until the 1500s. How were the books chosen? I am sure there were thousands of writings (papyrus, scrolls, etc.). Use your intelligence, I know it's in there!"

Your own words expose your ignorance. The Holy Bible, and the means to effectively create copies [have you heard of scribes?], and distribute it easily were in place, according to acedemics, by the early Christians, long before Constantine and his creation of the Mother of Harlots, RCism ever existed!3:50 PM

"Certain historians of Greek Civilization have claimed that papyrus books - that is, rolls - must have existed in Greece from the Homeric period (8 to 9 Centuries B.C.) with leather rolls going back to an even earlier time. However, the earliest surviving rolls of papyrus date from only the 4th Century B.C...

The very word biblion [i.e., book], comes from the material byblos (papyrus)The famous Dead Sea scrolls are, of course, in roll form, but the more recently discovered Nag Hammadi Gnostic Gospels [we're interested here in indicating an example pertaining to era, not in promoting the false gospels of the Gnostics] are in codex [books in leaf form & bound, as we identify books as being today].

It was in Rome that the wax tablet books [that is, Rome before Constantine, and we know that Rome occupied Palestine & Greece during the time of Our Lord's first comming, and during the period immediately following the Resurrection] were replaced by parchment leaves, or membranae, referred to in Martial. There were several virtues to this new type of codex. First, a text written in codex could be easily cited, a convenience QUICKLY realized by CHRISTIAN AUTHORS & SCRIBES [Well before RCism & the Council of Nicea!], who perhaps took over the codex form under the influence of Roman lawyers [i.e., well before RCism even existed]: EASE OF REFERENCE [because rolls are long and cumbersome] WAS IMPORTANT TO both legal & PATRISTIC SCHOLARSHIP. Second, the codex could receive writing on both sides of the leaf. Third, it was compact and could therefore store much longer texts. Fourth, it was more easily storable...

The codex form of the book was taken up VERY QUICKLY by CHRISTIANS, and soon only pagan works [excepting legal documents] were written in roll form. Perhaps it was the advantage of having an ENTIRE BIBLE, or at least a testament or commentary [27 NT books of which could still be easily stored, (along with OT books)],in one volume [i.e., text gathered into item as we currently understand the word volume, as opposed to its eytomological volume as the word is latin for roll(from evolvere =to roll)]; or perhaps it was the sheer "difference" from the pagan form [excepting pagan Rome's legal documentation] that attracted the CHRISTIANS. What ever the reasons, BY the THIRD CENTURY [200 A.D. onwards, about 120 years before Constantine] the roll was in decline, as was pagan literature itself...

So, early Christians very quickly adopted the codex form & well before 200 A.D., as by the 3rd Century [200A.D. onwards] the roll format was already in decline. It is therefore entirely feasable and highly probable that Christians had begun using the codex format by 100 A.D., if not before! And, if there were some still using rolls, so be it, but they still would've had the bible written down, though the acedemic explanation is, to repeat, that they were aready using codex, writing in the lingua franca of the Middle East & nearby countires, i.e., Greek not Latin!

Having my posts removed from the page after this one, yet pertaining to infromation on this page and the later page [THAT PAGE IS ARC & WARREN TOPIC] I will post them in succession here. They refer to 5:20 PM of the later page, who'd earlier made posts on this page!

1) Anon at 5:20 pm,

do you deny that Christians used the codex form before the 3rd Century, i.e. 200 AD? The point in question is was the Holy Bible, especially the 27 books of the New Testament already agreed apon and in circulation well before the invention of the Roman Catholic Church & therefore well before the Council of Nicea, the answer is yes to both of these points.

Secondly, the Roman Catholic Church deliberately kept the Latin Vulgate [ A poor & corrupt translation from the original Greek MANUSCRIPTS], allowed only the Roman Church heirarchy to read & interpret it, forbidding the laypersons to do so, even if they were extremely dynamic in reading texts, and murdered people such as Tyndale for translating the Bible, even the Corrupt Vulgate, let alone the Greek, into the vernacular. So Rome inhibited and demoted the disemination of the Holy Bible, & it did not originate the disemination of the 27 NT books!

[In fact, at the Council of Trent, Rome decided to include the Apocryphal books as part of Divinely Inspired Holy Scripture, which were important historical books, granted, but were NEVER PART of the True Canon of God's inspired Holy Scripture! It is a red herring for Rome to pretend it doesn't view the Apocrypha as part of God's Inspired Holy Scripture just because it terms the books of the Apocrypha as deutrocanonical, it does and to its great error!

(NO mention of any part of the Aprocryphal books is found in the New Testament, unlike the references in the New Testament pertaining to every one of the 39 books of the Old Testament)

How many people could read versus how many couldn't during the 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Centuries is irrelevant to the point of whether the contents of the 27 books had been agreed upon as Divinely given Holy Scripture, and whether the entirety, whether or not bound in one item, were in circulation well before Roman catholicism even existed. The answer to both questions being a resounding yes!

Again you pack your response with irrelevancy to the question at hand. Firstly, You infer the word 'mass' where I speak of circulation based upon your irrelevant premise of the notion that few people could read [despite you not providing percentages of such for the period in question of how many people, in Israel and Greece for example, could read, and how many dedicated scribes there were etc, even if you did, which you haven't, such information would be irrelevant, given the information I have provided for my points at hand.) Whether this is the case or no, IT IS IRRELEVANT to the question at hand, which favours my points due to the academic resources at hand.

Secondly, I note that the academic evidence points to the 27 books of the New Testament being in free circulation by 70 to 100 AD, facilitated by the codex form which in turn became the format overwhelmingly accepted by Christians for production and distribution of copies of the 27 books of the New Testament.

Your point, I repeat, over how many people were able to read is a red herring and you know it! The point is, I repeat again, that scholars agree, as the overwhelming evidence impels them to, that the inclusion of the 27 books into the New Testament canon and the distribution of all 27 books, was agreed long before the Roman 'Catholic' Institution ever existed, itself being established by Constantine!

Provide worthy academic evidence to refute my claims of the 27 books being recogised, copied and diseminated well before Constantine, his Council of Nicea, and establishment of Roman 'Catholicism'. You've provided no sources so far. Keep it relevant.

Face it, you don't like to face facts, and you have nothing substantial, despite your red-herrings, irrelevancies, strawmen, and diversions, and cannot back up anything you purport, relevant to my points, with which to refute my argument!

Educate yourself, and stop waffling, keep things relevant! You have done nothing but further highlight your ignorance of both academic method, the historic period we are concerned with, and my validated points at hand!

I can no longer humor you. It is pointless to try to educate you, for you are obviously unwilling to be educated or to provide any educated points outside speculation!

P.S., Anon at 5:20, regards your irrelevancies. You obviously have no concept of the history of oracy and literacy. If you did, you would not put up such strawmen. In cultures, relevant to the period and region to which my points pertain. Those who did not take up aprenticehips to learn to read and write and effectively be trained as scribes, and for the general populace who were neither rich nor offered the position to train as a scribe, were nonetheless in the habit of learning by memory, word for word, those things pertaining to Holy Scripture, which were relayed to them; a feat unimaginable by the vast majority of people in today's modern society in the West. Their memories were so habituated to storing such information repeated to them over and again, that the prospect of 'Chinese whispers', was negligable if not non-existent.

Notwithstanding my response above to your irrelevant and naive comments relating to literacy and the propensity to disseminate, the facts remain that evidentially the 27 books of the Holy Scripture were agreed upon as uniquely Holy Scripture regarding the New Testament and were freely disseminated in codex format long before Constantine and RCism. Those who read, did, and narrated to others who in turn committed the passages to memory in their entirety!

The Council of Nicea, presided over by Constantine just BEFORE the establishment of anything resembling or being the Roman 'Catholic' 'Church', dealt with Arianism and affirmed, because of doubts being sown by promoters of Arianism, the Divinity of Jesus Christ [already recognised by those of the Church that had not succumbed to anything pertaining to Arianism].

The Council of Nicea was not where the 27 books of the New Testament were first recognised as uniquely being that pertaining to inspired Scripture, which happened in the 1st Century organically and similtaneous to the period immediate to the completion of all that is contained within those blessed 27 books, the 27 books copied being disseminated from the word go! [70 -100 A.D.!]

I have nothing more to add, as you are obviously deaf and blind to the truth!

SEEING AS MY POST KEEPS DISAPPEARING, AND IS NOW JUMBLED LET IT BE SEEN IN ORDER! IF IT JUMBLES AGAIN, PLEASE FOLLOW THE NUMBERING!!

Again you pack your response with irrelevancy to the question at hand. Firstly, You infer the word 'mass' where I speak of circulation based upon your irrelevant premise of the notion that few people could read [despite you not providing percentages of such for the period in question of how many people, in Israel and Greece for example, could read, and how many dedicated scribes there were etc, even if you did, which you haven't, such information would be irrelevant, given the information I have provided for my points at hand.) Whether this is the case or no, IT IS IRRELEVANT to the question at hand, which favours my points due to the academic resources at hand.

Secondly, I note that the academic evidence points to the 27 books of the New Testament being in free circulation by 70 to 100 AD, facilitated by the codex form which in turn became the format overwhelmingly accepted by Christians for production and distribution of copies of the 27 books of the New Testament.

Your point, I repeat, over how many people were able to read is a red herring and you know it! The point is, I repeat again, that scholars agree, as the overwhelming evidence impels them to, that the inclusion of the 27 books into the New Testament canon and the distribution of all 27 books, was agreed long before the Roman 'Catholic' Institution ever existed, itself being established by Constantine!

Provide worthy academic evidence to refute my claims of the 27 books being recogised, copied and diseminated well before Constantine, his Council of Nicea, and establishment of Roman 'Catholicism'. You've provided no sources so far. Keep it relevant.

Face it, you don't like to face facts, and you have nothing substantial, despite your red-herrings, irrelevancies, strawmen, and diversions, and cannot back up anything you purport, relevant to my points, with which to refute my argument!

Educate yourself, and stop waffling, keep things relevant! You have done nothing but further highlight your ignorance of both academic method, the historic period we are concerned with, and my validated points at hand!

I can no longer humor you. It is pointless to try to educate you, for you are obviously unwilling to be educated or to provide any educated points outside speculation!

Mariel,Actually use of Yashuha has nothing to do with Judiazing as Yashuha is not the real name. The Jewish name is Yeshua, I really have no real Idea where the bastardized Yashuha comes from, but it is not by any stretch the name of Jesus.

About Me

As an active Michigan lawyer, I practice my profession primarily in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne counties of Michigan, USA (248-253-0333). Sometimes I do work in my old "stomping grounds" of our State Capitol, Lansing, Michigan on administrative, state law related matters, as well. I've enjoyed active and stimulating careers in government, politics, law and as a published and translated author. In the past, I have worked for the Michigan House of Representatives, the Michigan State Senate, and the City of Highland Park, Michigan. I'm the author of the first major critical book about the New Age Movement, THE HIDDEN DANGERS OF THE RAINBOW: The New Age Movement and our Coming Age of Barbarism (1983); A PLANNED DECEPTION: The Staging of a New Age Messiah (1986). Currently, I'm completing a volume about Javier Solana, the Barcelona Process, Israel and the European Union. Email me cumbey@gmail.com.